aaronofnero

It sounds exciting and my group needs 4k solution but I will not be paying the *Canon premium. I get the feeling a lot of the pros feel the same. What is the target audience for this?

*Rip off

How is it a rip off / likely to be a rip off? because the C 300 is rumored to be $16k? and that's a rip off because the Red Scarlet package is $14k and offers 4K for 24/25fps? And I assume Alexa is a rip off because it is $60k and only offers 1080p, yes? same with F3, as with SLOG it sits closer to $18k (just for the body) and still only offers 1080p.

And yet, all of this aside, Cameras for film-making have never been cheaper than they are now. Not long ago were these tools well into the 6 figure range, and you're going to compare the cost of a Red Scarlet with Canon, claiming a ridiculous price point when Canon and Nikon revolutionized the film-making market by giving DSLRs fantastic video functionality, and keeping them under $6 grand. Why is a scarlet not considered a rip off when a 5dmkII is $2k? Well, because the scarlet is considered a better camera for quality and functionality. Well, why is a Nikon D3s twice as much as the 5dmkII? It's certainly not a better camera... but, its just another camera for another price. why is the Alexa not widely recognized as a rip off since scarlet offers so much more and is 1/4th as much? well, because Alexa is a brand name people value and trust more, and associate with being a better camera in terms of performance. However, is Alexa actually a better camera than Red? Or are you more willing to complain about the 2000 dollar up charge on a less impressive Canon product?

In the mist of this, through all tests and battles, the Alexa - the most expensive of the bunch - still comes out on top, heralded as the best camera for film / cinematic use. Furthermore, movies aren't even being projected in 4k publicly yet, so I find it difficult to understand how someone "needs" 4k to make a movie, when ultimately it will be scaled down for 1080p. Sure, it'll look great, but so far i haven't seen the public complain too much about the clarity in the movies they've been watching for the past 20 years. Buy what works for you from a company you trust and value. Enough people have complained about the functionality issues of the EPICs, but what can you expect with a new company making efforts to jump into advanced technological territory? Can you blame them? Afterall, if the Scarlet malfunctions on you during a scene, you can remind yourself and your crew that it was cheaper than the c300 and f3.

I'm not defending the power of the c300. As it stands, i'm not terribly interested in owning one. The Scarlet is a fantastic option too, but i'm not really interested in owning one either. Personally, I'd rather spend more and get the F3, because I know I'll have a sufficient product that will function well and produce a beautiful image. I'll also know that, should it have issues, I have multiple outlets to go to for repair or consultation.

Either way, at the end of the day, we have technology at our fingertips that are producing ground-breaking imagery for a fraction of the cost.. and believe it or not, they're all priced in a relatively similar gamut.

I personally doubt this DSLR, while offering 4k, will be more expensive than the c300 - as it still stands to be in the DSLR form factor and not it's own body type. but even if it is, let's say $10k, would that still be a rip off? It's cheaper than Scarlet.. but, will it produce a better image than scarlet?

Red certainly raised the stakes, and I absolutely respect the company for it. I applaud them. But do i think they set the bar for price standards and should-be's? Not at all. As a company, while they offer some serious product, they haven't earned the trust and value that consumers share in Canon or Nikon or Arri or Panavision or Sony as a whole. As a new freelance designer, photographer, or cinematographer.. even if you are capable of providing a more promising and impressive product than the renowned individuals in your field, do you deserve to set the bar for their rates? If you charge $20 an hour, while they charge $200 an hour for a less advanced or interesting result, are they now a widely recognized rip off? You'll certainly be the reason their prices come down as you grow in popularity.. but you'll have to earn that trust and respect of the many before you can stand at their competitive height. Your price often reflects your portfolio, client list, affiliations, and reputation. In time we'll see even more competitive pricing for similar product, but until then - gripe not with the cost of a product, but rather marvel at what we have access to for the general price points they exist.. and be happy you can be competitively creative like those you admire for a fraction of what it used to cost them.

Are we certain that this camera will actually output 4K and not simply having a "4K" sensor like the C300?Anyway, this camera sounds exciting, but I am still a little worried about over segmentation of the video lineup and what that means for the camera that the majority of people are waiting for.The 5DII, over three years ago offered an unparalleled combination of photo quality, video quality and features and price. Will the 5DIII do the same in 2012? Can Canon give the 5DIII top of the line IQ and sell it for 3K without eating too much into the C300s or this "1DC" sales?Is there enough difference between the 5DII and the C300 for the 5DIII to fit in so that it would both be noticeably better than the 5DII and not too close to the C300? Can the 5DIII receive 1080p60 that so many people have been asking for? Does Canon hope to move enough C300 units based on form factor and utility features alone or will they artificially handicap the less expensive cameras?

aaronofnero

Are we certain that this camera will actually output 4K and not simply having a "4K" sensor like the C300?Anyway, this camera sounds exciting, but I am still a little worried about over segmentation of the video lineup and what that means for the camera that the majority of people are waiting for.The 5DII, over three years ago offered an unparalleled combination of photo quality, video quality and features and price. Will the 5DIII do the same in 2012? Can Canon give the 5DIII top of the line IQ and sell it for 3K without eating too much into the C300s or this "1DC" sales?Is there enough difference between the 5DII and the C300 for the 5DIII to fit in so that it would both be noticeably better than the 5DII and not too close to the C300? Can the 5DIII receive 1080p60 that so many people have been asking for? Does Canon hope to move enough C300 units based on form factor and utility features alone or will they artificially handicap the less expensive cameras?

I would suspect that they would put out a camera that will be either of equal, or lesser value to the c300. I'd say it's a safe assumption that it would lack many desired features if the intention is to keep the cost relatively low (or at least lower than the c300). I couldn't imagine that they would add significant features to it to stump the c300 so quickly, and even so.. pricing it higher than c300, if it were to be a superior camera, would dismiss the "flagship" announcement they made quickly as well.

That being said, if this isn't any parallelism to the 5dmkIII, then i wouldn't expect the 5d to be a game changer as it once was. it'll likely be similar to the 1dx, with alternate features to justify an assumed 3k (give or take 500) price range.

It sounds exciting and my group needs 4k solution but I will not be paying the *Canon premium. I get the feeling a lot of the pros feel the same. What is the target audience for this?

*Rip off

How is it a rip off / likely to be a rip off? because the C 300 is rumored to be $16k? and that's a rip off because the Red Scarlet package is $14k and offers 4K for 24/25fps? And I assume Alexa is a rip off because it is $60k and only offers 1080p, yes? same with F3, as with SLOG it sits closer to $18k (just for the body) and still only offers 1080p.

And yet, all of this aside, Cameras for film-making have never been cheaper than they are now. Not long ago were these tools well into the 6 figure range, and you're going to compare the cost of a Red Scarlet with Canon, claiming a ridiculous price point when Canon and Nikon revolutionized the film-making market by giving DSLRs fantastic video functionality, and keeping them under $6 grand. Why is a scarlet not considered a rip off when a 5dmkII is $2k? Well, because the scarlet is considered a better camera for quality and functionality. Well, why is a Nikon D3s twice as much as the 5dmkII? It's certainly not a better camera... but, its just another camera for another price. why is the Alexa not widely recognized as a rip off since scarlet offers so much more and is 1/4th as much? well, because Alexa is a brand name people value and trust more, and associate with being a better camera in terms of performance. However, is Alexa actually a better camera than Red? Or are you more willing to complain about the 2000 dollar up charge on a less impressive Canon product?

In the mist of this, through all tests and battles, the Alexa - the most expensive of the bunch - still comes out on top, heralded as the best camera for film / cinematic use. Furthermore, movies aren't even being projected in 4k publicly yet, so I find it difficult to understand how someone "needs" 4k to make a movie, when ultimately it will be scaled down for 1080p. Sure, it'll look great, but so far i haven't seen the public complain too much about the clarity in the movies they've been watching for the past 20 years. Buy what works for you from a company you trust and value. Enough people have complained about the functionality issues of the EPICs, but what can you expect with a new company making efforts to jump into advanced technological territory? Can you blame them? Afterall, if the Scarlet malfunctions on you during a scene, you can remind yourself and your crew that it was cheaper than the c300 and f3.

I'm not defending the power of the c300. As it stands, i'm not terribly interested in owning one. The Scarlet is a fantastic option too, but i'm not really interested in owning one either. Personally, I'd rather spend more and get the F3, because I know I'll have a sufficient product that will function well and produce a beautiful image. I'll also know that, should it have issues, I have multiple outlets to go to for repair or consultation.

Either way, at the end of the day, we have technology at our fingertips that are producing ground-breaking imagery for a fraction of the cost.. and believe it or not, they're all priced in a relatively similar gamut.

I personally doubt this DSLR, while offering 4k, will be more expensive than the c300 - as it still stands to be in the DSLR form factor and not it's own body type. but even if it is, let's say $10k, would that still be a rip off? It's cheaper than Scarlet.. but, will it produce a better image than scarlet?

Red certainly raised the stakes, and I absolutely respect the company for it. I applaud them. But do i think they set the bar for price standards and should-be's? Not at all. As a company, while they offer some serious product, they haven't earned the trust and value that consumers share in Canon or Nikon or Arri or Panavision or Sony as a whole. As a new freelance designer, photographer, or cinematographer.. even if you are capable of providing a more promising and impressive product than the renowned individuals in your field, do you deserve to set the bar for their rates? If you charge $20 an hour, while they charge $200 an hour for a less advanced or interesting result, are they now a widely recognized rip off? You'll certainly be the reason their prices come down as you grow in popularity.. but you'll have to earn that trust and respect of the many before you can stand at their competitive height. Your price often reflects your portfolio, client list, affiliations, and reputation. In time we'll see even more competitive pricing for similar product, but until then - gripe not with the cost of a product, but rather marvel at what we have access to for the general price points they exist.. and be happy you can be competitively creative like those you admire for a fraction of what it used to cost them.

I agree with what you're saying completely. I think that the 4k DSLR will be $3k-$5k and will be the big seller for Canon and the answer for video people waiting on the 5D Mark III. I think the 5DIII will be more stills oriented (as the 5DII was really, it just gradually turned into a video camera).

aaronofnero

Whatever, first Canon must show decent 4K quality video picture than we can talk about other stuff. Wonder if they will make more than 8 bit colors ...and what codec they will use.

I'm sure they could swing a pleasant 4K image. However, I highly doubt they'll push 10-bit when c300 only handles 8-bit. I would half-expect another h.264, or similar compression in the interest of saving processing power and pricing it under the c300. Ultimately, I wouldn't expect the image quality/clarity to be as well-defined as the c300. I would also guess the sensor's are very similar, but there has to be some sacrifice elsewhere to justify this "4k release" as less flagship-worthy than the c300. It ought to be sharper or less noisy than the 5dmk2/7d/1dmk4, but i don't think by much.

Now, on another thought.. let's say Canon releases a 4k DSLR body that is by all accounts comparably equal to or better than the c300 - AND at a lower price point (let's say subjectively $8,000-$10,000) - but, what if the c300 is upgradeable with software updates/purchases? Or maybe Canon is taking a tidbit of Red's business structure, and will allow the c300 to be hardware-upgradeable. Let's imagine for a minute that, by the time this 4K camera drops, the c300 could be capable of a bitrate upgrade to 10-bit uncompressed output, 1080p60, 2k-4kp24/25/30, and maybe a C LOGv2 that allows for further color adjustment and noise suppression allowing even further sensitivity above 20,000 ISO. I might anticipate to see a potential Red EPIC, Sony F65, Arri Alexa Plus competitor from Canon in 2013 or 2014 where they're pushing the 4k-8k, 10-16bit uncompressed 4:4:4, High ISO sensitivity / low noise, 120-300fps possibilities. However, that would really come down to how involved Canon is looking to get in the film industry.

Logged

aaronofnero

I agree with what you're saying completely. I think that the 4k DSLR will be $3k-$5k and will be the big seller for Canon and the answer for video people waiting on the 5D Mark III. I think the 5DIII will be more stills oriented (as the 5DII was really, it just gradually turned into a video camera).

Yes, I'd say you're correct. I'd lean more towards the $5000 dollar range, but I would suspect this to be driven specifically for the video market that built off the 5dmkII / Video DSLR revolution. I'm sure Canon has a desire to keep their 5d model line true to the professional photographer, rather than simply transition it over to the video enthusiast. It makes sense as the 1Dx merges the 1D and 1Ds models, priced between the two, and the 5D and 7D are dedicated photo cameras with fantastic video features for the photo-journalist or wildlife photographer. It would be beneficial and prove to be more organized for Canon to refocus their video efforts into a new line as they're doing with the c300 and this new video DSLR.

I'm sure Canon has a desire to keep their 5d model line true to the professional photographer, rather than simply transition it over to the video enthusiast. It makes sense as the 1Dx merges the 1D and 1Ds models, priced between the two, and the 5D and 7D are dedicated photo cameras with fantastic video features for the photo-journalist or wildlife photographer. It would be beneficial and prove to be more organized for Canon to refocus their video efforts into a new line as they're doing with the c300 and this new video DSLR.[/quote]

The big question is how fantastic the new 5D and 7D can realistically be if the lineup includes dedicated video cameras.I have no doubt that Canon would want those who do both stills and video to buy one of each - a stills camera and a video camera but the market will not tolerate that. I would love to be able to justify the expense of two dedicated cameras but I can't and I am not sure how many of the 5DII user base can. What can I say, Canon spoiled us with the 5DII. We got used to the combination of features/cost that the 5DII offers and breaking that balance could backfire in Canon's face. More so since I am sure that in at attempt to capture market share other manufacturers will jump in with a set of features/cost that is expected from a 2012 5D.

daveswan

The odd bits I've read elsewhere mutter about the 4k being an "H" crop from a FF sensor like the one in the new 1Dx.

As for codec, again from what little I've read, the FF sensor will be downsampled to a 1080p H264 codec, while the 4k crop will be encoded as a MJPEG.

Most of what I've gleaned has been from DPR (Can I mention them? I'm new here).

Now as for bit rates, again mainly from DPR, (And in truth discussing the 1Dx) I've heard talk of:

A mysterious very high bit-rate codec that can fill a 16 gig card in 6 min (Say 360mbps), that seems too high for a bog-standard H264 jobbie.

A 100-ish mbps codec

A 30-35 mbps

There was also mention of a high bit rate I-frame H264 codec and a low bit rate IPB H264 codec

So I wonder, putting 2 and 2 together, and hopefully making 4, not 22, are we seeing (For this mysterious C-DSLR), a FF 1080p 100 mbps I-frame and a 360 mbps MJPEG codec. I would make sense.

I also don't see any competition between the C-DSLR and the C300, assuming that the C300 is a complete cine solution with on-board audio and whatnot, while the C-DSLR is pure image-making machine, perhaps for VFX.

What you will more than likely find is that the 4k DSLR will be the same as the C300 4K sensor but outputs to 1080p.

From what i have heard its more likely going to be the same as the 5D3, in terms of it will be a cut down version of the 1DX but with the C300 as its base.

Hey if thats true I'm all for it.

More cinema focused DSLR, full manual controls and no need to worry about focusing on the photography issues that a camera such as the 5D3 would have. (e.g. Auto Focus etc) but instead making it the best video quality at a budget.

On saying all that the C300 has dropped a fair bit already in price, wonder if this will end up coming out for a RRP around $8k and then drop to around $5k retail?

daveswan

The C-300 sensor isn't "really" 4k, it's 4 x 1920x1080 mosaics interleaved together and DSP'd to give the same effect as a 3-chip 1080p sensor block.

I'm hoping for a FF sensor with a 4k window. Thus you'd have a FF 1080p output, with clean down-sampling (As I've head the 1Dx can do) to an H264 codec (Hopefully 100 mbps I-Frame), and a windowed (To H-crop, a bit bigger than s35) 4k mosaic that doesn't have to be down-sampled at all to a 360mbps MJPEG.

Thinking about that entirely hypothetical 360mbps codec, 4k is about 4x 1080p as far as resolution is concerned. Now 1/4 360 is 90, so, for comparison, do we have any 90mbps MJPEGs to compare it with? Yes, we do.There is the Pentax K5 with a 75 mbps MJPEG, of which I've heard good things (Shame about the grotty controls) and the hacked GH1 (Or is it GH2, can't remember) with a 90 mbps MJPEG, which got people very exited over on dvxuser, even though both of these involve down-sampling a high mp sensor using various flawed methods.A hypothetical full raster 360 mbps MJPEG from a 4k sensor with no dawn-sampling should be pretty good.

I agree with what you're saying completely. I think that the 4k DSLR will be $3k-$5k and will be the big seller for Canon and the answer for video people waiting on the 5D Mark III. I think the 5DIII will be more stills oriented (as the 5DII was really, it just gradually turned into a video camera).

Yes, I'd say you're correct. I'd lean more towards the $5000 dollar range, but I would suspect this to be driven specifically for the video market that built off the 5dmkII / Video DSLR revolution. I'm sure Canon has a desire to keep their 5d model line true to the professional photographer, rather than simply transition it over to the video enthusiast. It makes sense as the 1Dx merges the 1D and 1Ds models, priced between the two, and the 5D and 7D are dedicated photo cameras with fantastic video features for the photo-journalist or wildlife photographer. It would be beneficial and prove to be more organized for Canon to refocus their video efforts into a new line as they're doing with the c300 and this new video DSLR.

I agree with this too, Canon didn't know that the 5DII would be such a big seller in the video realm.....And with the release of the whole Cinema EOS line it seems pretty clear that they are trying to keep the two separate at this point.

Canon knows exactly whats at stake, they know what we love about DSLR's, they know what we hate about them. They have seen the FS100, F3, AG100 come out and they don't seem to be too worried about it. I have complete faith that they will be releasing products that satisfy both the photographer and videographer segments.

I don't get why people freak out about the price tag of $16k-$20k on the C300, it's obvious that camera was geared towards professionals and big productions. They know how much demand there is from the consumer segment and they would be foolish not to try and make something for them.

I understand their reasoning, they wanted to establish credibility with the bigwigs first, and then release something for the rest of us. If they had just released another DSLR that shoots video the major studios would probably have thought "oh, well I guess Canon really only wants to serve the Indie market," and wouldn't have given it a second look.

People keep comparing specs between the Scarlett, C300 and whatever else, which is not a good way to compare stuff. I still remember having my 18MP T2i and thinking it was better than my buddy's 1D Mark II (since it was only 12), numbers aren't everything. I've heard nothing but glowing reviews about the C300, that it feels natural, produces beautiful skin tones, and performs incredibly well in low light. Just because a camera isn't geared towards you doesn't mean that its no good.